3 ms·

It's just a matter of time before we see ARM's in Macbooks. I wonder if we'll see Rosetta make an appearance for binary backward-compatibility again.

jowiar 10y ago
I'm thinking it's more likely that MacBooks (and probably Macs) are killed off altogether (or merged into iPads). I think we're about 2 iOS iterations away from the iPad being a complete Macbook replacement (and we're there for a vast majority of consumers right now). I'm assuming Xcode for iOS arriving next year, along with loosening the restrictions on running locally-developed code. Then one more year to clean things up. Couple that with a few little hiccups in iOS self-sufficiency (read: System restores, another year for the software ecosystem to fill out), and we're there.
- _ph_ 10y ago
  As much as I like iOS for my iPhone, for replacing a "Computer" Apple would need to introduce some kind of file system, where data can be shared between apps, and lift most restrictions about what apps can do. A linux VM running on an iPad would be a game-changer for me.
  - jowiar 10y ago
    It's getting there, with the evolution of sharesheets + iCloud Drive. I've been meaning to play around with a 4g iPad + cloud boxes for webdev and analytics workflow.
_ph_ 10y ago
Rosetta worked, because the Intel chips were much faster than the PowerPcs back then. I doubt that the ARMs would have a sufficient large lead in performance. And there are plenty of reasons to run x86 code on Macs, be it older programs which might not be ported to ARM, or all the Windows and Linux stuff running in VMs. As much as I would like an ARM based laptop, it would be much less practical than an x86 one.
- majewsky 10y ago
  > As much as I would like an ARM based laptop, it would be much less practical than an x86 one. We don't need to guess here. Look at the failure of Surface RT.
  - jhugg 10y ago
    The RT didn’t have an X86 translation layer like is being discussed in this thread.
extra88 10y ago
More likely than something Rosetta-like are "universal applications," application bundles containing both x86 and ARM executables.

jowiar 10y ago

I'm thinking it's more likely that MacBooks (and probably Macs) are killed off altogether (or merged into iPads). I think we're about 2 iOS iterations away from the iPad being a complete Macbook replacement (and we're there for a vast majority of consumers right now). I'm assuming Xcode for iOS arriving next year, along with loosening the restrictions on running locally-developed code. Then one more year to clean things up. Couple that with a few little hiccups in iOS self-sufficiency (read: System restores, another year for the software ecosystem to fill out), and we're there.

_ph_ 10y ago
As much as I like iOS for my iPhone, for replacing a "Computer" Apple would need to introduce some kind of file system, where data can be shared between apps, and lift most restrictions about what apps can do. A linux VM running on an iPad would be a game-changer for me.
- jowiar 10y ago
  It's getting there, with the evolution of sharesheets + iCloud Drive. I've been meaning to play around with a 4g iPad + cloud boxes for webdev and analytics workflow.

_ph_ 10y ago

Rosetta worked, because the Intel chips were much faster than the PowerPcs back then. I doubt that the ARMs would have a sufficient large lead in performance. And there are plenty of reasons to run x86 code on Macs, be it older programs which might not be ported to ARM, or all the Windows and Linux stuff running in VMs. As much as I would like an ARM based laptop, it would be much less practical than an x86 one.

majewsky 10y ago
> As much as I would like an ARM based laptop, it would be much less practical than an x86 one. We don't need to guess here. Look at the failure of Surface RT.
- jhugg 10y ago
  The RT didn’t have an X86 translation layer like is being discussed in this thread.

extra88 10y ago

More likely than something Rosetta-like are "universal applications," application bundles containing both x86 and ARM executables.